United States v. Gouveia
United States v. Gouveia, 467 U.S. 180 (1984), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that prisoners in administrative segregation pending the investigation of crimes committed within the prison had no Sixth Amendment entitlement to counsel prior to the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings against them.[1] In an opinion written by Justice William Rehnquist, the Court stated that the right to counsel may extend to "'critical' pretrial proceedings" that are adversarial in nature, but the Sixth Amendment right to counsel "attaches at the initiation of adversary judicial criminal proceedings".[2]
| United States v. Gouveia | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued March 20, 1984 Decided May 29, 1984 | |
| Full case name | United States v. William Gouveia, et al. |
| Citations | 467 U.S. 180 (more) 104 S. Ct. 2292; 81 L. Ed. 2d 146; 1984 U.S. LEXIS 91; 52 U.S.L.W. 4659 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Cert. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
| Holding | |
| Respondents were not constitutionally entitled to the appointment of counsel while they were in administrative segregation and before any adversary judicial proceedings had been initiated against them. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by Burger, White, Blackmun, Powell, O'Connor |
| Concurrence | Stevens, joined by Brennan |
| Dissent | Marshall |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. VI | |
See also
References
- United States v. Gouveia, 467 U.S. 180, 189 (1984).
- Gouveia, 467 U.S. at 189-90 (noting that "[o]ur speedy trial cases hold that that Sixth Amendment right may attach before an indictment and as early as the time of 'arrest and holding to answer a criminal charge ....'").
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.